Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
3 pending office actions • 2 art units • 3 examiners • 0 of 3 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Stetrix, Inc. operates in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. The company has 3 pending office actions. These actions are distributed among 3 distinct examiners, ensuring independent evaluation for each matter. This distribution suggests that the company's applications are subject to multiple perspectives rather than a single point of review.
The prosecution involves 2 distinct art units. This suggests that the company's innovations are being categorized into two different specialized groups. Practitioners must be prepared to address the specific nuances of these 2 units. The variety of units indicates that the portfolio's technical scope is not limited to a single specialized niche.
MOK, ANDREW JUN-WAI is the busiest examiner for the portfolio. This examiner is responsible for 1 pending office action. The busiest examiner pending count is 1, confirming that the workload is evenly split among the examiners. No single examiner has a concentrated influence over the current pending portfolio. Practitioners should focus on the individual requirements of each official to move the applications forward.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 2 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date; the rest are excluded from the tile counts.
Difficulty is derived from the rejection statutes on the most recent pending office action. §101-driven and multi-statute cases are graded Hard; §112-only and obviousness-type double-patenting cases are graded Easy; everything else is Medium. "Unknown" means we have not yet parsed a statute for that office action.
| Bucket | Cases |
|---|---|
| §102 only | 1 (33%) |
| Double-patenting + other | 1 (33%) |
| Multi-statute (no §101) | 1 (33%) |
How the docket's pending cases split across USPTO tech-center bands.
Manual office-action response work runs about 10 hours per case. The time-saved bands below show what IP Author's prosecution pipeline typically delivers — a conservative 20% on the low end, 35% in the middle, 50% on the high end.
| Examiner | Apps on this docket | Allow rate | Interview lift |
|---|---|---|---|
| MOK, ANDREW JUN-WAI | 1 | 53.3% | +65.4% |
| SHI, KATHERINE MENGLIN | 1 | 78.4% | +21.7% |
| VARGAS, ANNA ELIZABETH | 1 | 58.5% | +50.2% |
Multi-statute / §101-driven matters, or cases in front of an examiner with an allow rate under 30%. The top 1 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18637870 | Abdominal Tissue Lifting Device | VARGAS, ANNA ELIZABETH | 16d |
Cases in front of an examiner whose interview lift is 10 percentage points or more — i.e. interviewed cases historically resolve more favorably than non-interviewed ones. The top 3 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19228941 | PERIANAL SUPPORT DEVICE WITH FLEXIBLE SIDE SUPPORTS | MOK, ANDREW JUN-WAI | 5d |
| 18637870 | Abdominal Tissue Lifting Device | VARGAS, ANNA ELIZABETH | 16d |
| 19027466 | Externally Applied Intrapartum Support Device | SHI, KATHERINE MENGLIN | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3786 | 1 |
| 3783 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19228941 | PERIANAL SUPPORT DEVICE WITH FLEXIBLE SIDE SUPPORTS | MOK, ANDREW JUN-WAI | 3786 | §102 | Final Rejection | 5d | Pending | Jun 05, 2025 |
| 19027466 | Externally Applied Intrapartum Support Device | SHI, KATHERINE MENGLIN | — | §102§103§112DP | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Jan 17, 2025 |
| 18637870 | Abdominal Tissue Lifting Device | VARGAS, ANNA ELIZABETH | 3783 | §102§103 | Final Rejection | 16d | Pending | Apr 17, 2024 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial